Chapter published in:
L3 Syntactic Transfer: Models, new developments and implications
Edited by Tanja Angelovska and Angela Hahn
[Bilingual Processing and Acquisition 5] 2017
► pp. 299–319

Input-Practice-Output

A method for teaching L3 English after L2 German with a focus on syntactic transfer

| Ludwig-Maximilians University
| University of Salzburg
In the field of Instructed Third Language Acquisition (ITLA), teachers are left alone not knowing how to predict possible transfer phenomena, how to overcome them and how to raise their learners’ metalinguistic awareness. We start from the existing results and non-results of L3 acquisition (transfer) and develop practical applications as part of the Input-Practice-Output Method showing that a combination of these three phases allows for an individual, learner-centered and teacher’s awareness-based framework in ITLA. We offer implications for designing teaching materials, planning lessons for multilingual classrooms and for classroom action research.
Keywords: Instructed Third Language Acquisition, negative transfer, Input-Practice-Output-Method, teaching material, teaching implications
Published online: 15 August 2017
https://doi.org/10.1075/bpa.5.14hah
References

References

Allgäuer-Hackl, E., & Jessner, U.
(2013) Mehrsprachigkeitsunterricht aus mehrsprachiger Sicht. Zur Förderung des metalinguistischen Bewusstseins. In E. Vetter (Ed.), Professionalisierung für sprachliche Vielfalt. Die Ausbildung von Sprachenlehrer/innen (pp. 111–147). Hohengehren: Schneider.Google Scholar
Angelovska, T., & Benati, A. G.
(2013) Processing instruction and the age factor: Can adults and school-age native speakers of German process English simple past tense correctly? In J. F. Lee & A. Benati (Eds.), Individual differences and Processing Instruction (pp. 131–152). Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
Angelovska, T., & Hahn, A.
(2012) Written L3 (English): Transfer phenomena of L2 (German) lexical and syntactical properties. In D. Gabrys-Barker (Ed.), Crosslinguistic influences in multilingual language acquisition (pp. 23–40). Heidelberg: Springer. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2013) Raising language awareness for learning and teaching L3 grammar. In A. Benati, C. Laval, & M. Arche (Eds.), The grammar dimension in instructed second language learning (pp. 185–207). London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
Angelovska, T.
(2017) (When) do L3 English learners transfer from L2 German? Evidence from spoken and written data by L1 Russian speakers. In T. Angelovska & A. Hahn (Eds.), L3 syntactic transfer: Models, new developments and implications (Bilingual Processing and Acquisition 5). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Benati, A., & Angelovska, T.
(2015) The effects of processing instruction on the acquisition of English simple past tense: Age and cognitive task demands. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL), 53(2), 249–269. Crossref.Google Scholar
Bergmann, J., & Sams, A.
(2012) Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. Eugene OR: International Society for Technology in Education.Google Scholar
Burns, A.
(2007) Action research: Contributions and further directions in ELT. In J. Cummins, & C. Davison (Eds.), International handbook of English language teaching, Part II. Berlin: Springer Science+Business Media LLC. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Byrne, D.
(1976) Teaching Oral English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Cenoz, J.
(2001) The effect of linguistic distance, L2 status and age on cross-linguistic influence in third language acquisition. Cross-Linguistic Influence in Third Language Acquisition: Psycholinguistic Perspectives, 111(45), 8–20.Google Scholar
Dalton-Puffer, C., Faistauer, R., & Vetter, E.
(2011) Research on language teaching and learning in Austria (2004–2009). Language Teaching, 44(2), 181–211. Crossref.Google Scholar
De Angelis, G.
(2007) Third or additional language acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
(2012) Teachers’ beliefs about the role of prior language knowledge in language learning. International Journal of Multilingualism, 8(3), 216–234. Crossref.Google Scholar
Gass, S. M., & Selinker, L.
(Eds.) (1983) Language transfer in language learning. Issues in second language research. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.Google Scholar
González Alonso, J., & Rothman, J.
(2017) From theory to practice in multilingualism: What theoretical research implies for third language learning. In T. Angelovska & A. Hahn (Eds.), L3 Syntactic Transfer: Models, New Developments and Implications (Bilingual Processing and Acquisition 5). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hufeisen B., & Neuner, G.
(Eds.) (2003) Mehrsprachigkeitskonzept – Tertiarsprachen – Deutsch nach Englisch. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publishing.Google Scholar
Jenkins, J.
(2015) Repositioning English and multilingualism in English as a Lingua Franca. Englishes in Practice, 2(3), 49–85. Crossref.Google Scholar
Jessner, U.
(2008) Teaching third languages: Findings, trends and challenges. Language Teaching, 41(1), 15–56. Crossref.Google Scholar
Klieme, E.
(2006) Zusammenfassung zentraler Ergebnisse der DESI-Studie. Retrieved from http://​www​.dipf​.de​/de​/forschung​/projekte​/pdf​/biqua​/DESI​_Ausgewaehlte​_Ergebnisse​.pdf (2 May 2016).
Krashen, S.
(1982) Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon: Oxford.Google Scholar
Lage, M. J., Platt, G. J., & Treglia, M.
(2000) Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment. The Journal of Economic Education, 31(1), 30–43. Crossref.Google Scholar
Lee, J., & VanPatten, B.
(2003) Making communicative language happen. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Muñoz, C.
(2011) Is input more significant than starting age in foreign language acquisition? International Review of Applied Linguistics (IRAL), 49(2), 113–133. Crossref.Google Scholar
Muñoz, C., & Singleton, D.
(2011) A critical review of age-related research on L2 ultimate attainment. Language Teaching, 44(1), 1–35. Crossref.Google Scholar
Piske, T., & Young-Scholten, M.
(Eds.) (2008) Input matters in SLA. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Rothman, J.
(2010) On the typological economy of syntactic transfer: Word order and relative clause high/low attachment preference in L3 Brazilian Portuguese. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL), 48(2–3), 245–273. Crossref.Google Scholar
(2011) L3 syntactic transfer selectivity and typological determinacy: The Typological Primacy Model. Second Language Research, 27(1), 107–127. Crossref.Google Scholar
Rothman, J., & Cabrelli Amaro, J.
(2010) What variables condition syntactic transfer? A look at the L3 initial state. Second Language Research, 26(2), 189–218. Crossref.Google Scholar
Sharwood-Smith, M.
(2009) A MOGUL perspective on consciousness and input processing. Plenary presentation given at the 2009 conference on Second Language Processing and Parsing: State of the Science. Texas State University. Retrieved from www​.academia​.edu
Sharwood Smith, M., & Kellerman, E.
(Eds.) (1986) Crosslinguistic influence in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon Institute of English.Google Scholar
Sharwood-Smith, M., & Truscott, J.
(2014) Explaining input enhancement: A MOGUL perspective. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching (IRAL), 52(3), 253–281. Crossref.Google Scholar
Stöckl, H., & Klug, N.-M.
(2014) Sprache im multimodalen Kontext. In E. Felder & A. Gardt (Eds.), Handbuch Sprache und Wissen (HB Sprachwissen 1) (pp. 242–264). Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Thornbury, S.
(2006) An AZ of ELT: A dictionary of terms and concepts. Macmillan Books. Oxford: Macmillian.Google Scholar
Truscott, J., & Sharwood Smith, M.
(2004) Acquisition by processing: A modular approach to language development. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 7(1), 1–20. Crossref.Google Scholar
Ullmann, J., & Hahn, A.
(2016) Integration von Erklärvideos in einen Englisch Selbstlernkurs. In C. Becker, G. Blell, & A. Rössler (Eds.), Web 2.0 und Komplexe Kompetenzaufgaben im Fremdsprachenunterricht. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Ur, P.
(2013) Language-teaching method revisited. ELT Journal, 67(4), 468–474. Crossref.Google Scholar
VanPatten, B.
(2015) Processing perspectives on pedagogical intervention. In J. W. Schwieter (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of bilingual processing (pp. 200–215). Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wright, T.
(2002) Doing language awareness: Issues for language study in language teacher education. In H. Trappes-Lomax & G. Ferguson (Eds.), Language in language teacher education (Language Learning & Language Teaching 4). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by other publications

Angelovska, Tanja
2017.  In L3 Syntactic Transfer [Bilingual Processing and Acquisition, 5], ► pp. 195 ff. Crossref logo
Angelovska, Tanja
2018. Cross-linguistic awareness of adult L3 learners of English: a focus on metalinguistic reflections and proficiency. Language Awareness 27:1-2 ► pp. 136 ff. Crossref logo
Angelovska, Tanja
2019.  In The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching, ► pp. 1 ff. Crossref logo
Rothman, Jason, Jorge González Alonso & Eloi Puig-Mayenco
2019.  In Third Language Acquisition and Linguistic Transfer, Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 30 december 2020. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.